• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 데모 (maps.google.com.qa) Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 불법 (taikwu.com.tw) the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.